Advanced Hermeneutics Outlined - feridoon.comferidoon.com/Articles-W/English/Advanced Hermeneutics Outlined.pdf · Advanced Hermeneutics Outlined-Feridoon Mokhof 3 These basic steps

Advanced

Hermeneutics

Outlined

By Feridoon Mokhof

[ADVANCED HERMENEUTICS OUTLINED-FERIDOON MOKHOF]

Advanced Hermeneutics Outlined-Feridoon Mokhof

2

I. EXEGESIS (THE PRACTICE)

A. Inductive

Inductive reasoning tries to rebuild the original pattern and construction of the book,

chapter or paragraph under investigation. With inductive study, rather than answering

questions, the Exegete will analyze a section of Scripture and try to determine what the

author was trying to convey. Inductive Bible Study involves the observance of possible cases

and then assumes it is true in the other cases that have not been tested. “As a result,

Inductive Bible Study uses the imagination to move from observation of the Scripture to the

theories or concepts that explicate truths for application.

Deductive reasoning starts with the general and moves to the particular and is therefore a

priori (prior to looking at the facts). Inductive reasoning, on the other hand, starts with the

particular and moves to the general and is therefore a posteriori (after seeing the evidence).

A Major issue in the process of inductive reasoning is experience verses Biblical truth.

Experience must never be the tool used to interpret Scripture. Understanding how to

execute an inductive study is indispensable for developing sound teachings. Inductive

reason forms specific instances to a general rule. It observes specific instances and notices

specific pattern. The inductive method of Exegesis is also called the discovery method of

Exegesis. Induction is a process in which a person begins with specific, individual items,

facts, instances, observations and puts them together to form a general principle.

1. Steps of Inductive Study

There are three basic steps to inductive Bible study:

a. Observation Reveals what the text says. In this step we need to

record observations, make Note of themes, and Notice Divisions.

b. Deliberation focuses on the general Hermeneutics, context, history

and language. Here basic observations begin to identify; we need to

observe outlines, key words, key Phrases, key verse or verses, theological

themes, journalistic questions, parallel passages, extra biblical materials,

genre

c. Application centers on the practical and relevant truth to be lived

out as a Christian in today's world in relation to the meaning of the

concentration of how it applies to me. In this step we will go through

three stages of; making application, obedience, and homiletic


3

These basic steps will enable us to better understand the Scriptures. We need to pray

before the start of our study and remain in an attitude of prayer as we do in order to show

God our dependency on Him and to ensure our fruitful study of spiritual truth.

B. Deductive

Unlike the Inductive Method of Bible Study, Deductive Exegesis uses logic rather than

imagination to draw its conclusion. Deductive analysis may initially derive its primary

conclusion thorough inductive reasoning. Deductive Exegesis is used to prove a point rather

than determine the truth of Scripture. This method of Biblical analysis brings preconceptions

to the Bible Study and then seeks out Biblical data to prove these presumptions.

A Deductive approach to Bible Study is often called the extending conjecture approach

because the assumptions that the Bible Student has before he goes to the Bible are, often

unconsciously, carried with him to the Bible and applied to or extended into the Biblical

text. As he reads the passage with certain ideas already in mind, he will probably not see all

that is there to see in the passage.

The deductive reasoning process often happens without the person being aware that he is

using a deductive process, or that he is violating the text by reading meaning into it rather

than allowing the text to give out its own inherent meaning.

C. Charting Books

By charting a book, chapter or passage, we maintain continuity with the rest of the book,

chapter or verse and nothing is taken out of context. We must maintain that a text has

meaning, so long as it remains in relation to its parent text.

1. Four levels of reading:

The first level is called Preparatory Reading. This level of reading is only superficial.

Preparatory reading is a quick read of the book that we intend to study.

The second level is called Investigative Reading. At this point, the reader is trying only to

identify key points. At this level of reading, the student should try to establish the historical

situation of the book.

The third level is called Analytical Reading. At this stage of reading, we are no longer

interested in superficial data. We are now in the process of definitive in-depth analysis. At

this stage of reading, study every little detail so that nothing is missed. Here, the student

should try to establish the historical and theological context of the book. The student should

ask questions such as. What are the controlling themes of this book? Who are the people

involved? Why and where did the event take place? Are there any sub-plots?

The fourth level of reading is called Comparative Reading. This becomes especially


4

applicable when we read the Bible. We must allow Scripture to interpret Scripture.

2. A Charting method

In Charting we need to find the system that will best suit our methods. This part of our study

goes through several stages:

a. Make a Superficial Analysis. During the first few times through the book read I

swiftly, and preferably read it in one sitting without interruption. Ignore the chapter

and verse divisions. Try to determine the mood of the author when he wrote the

book. Make note of any major themes or topics that present themselves. Also make

note of any recurring thoughts or subjects. Remember that Observations and

interpretations should be placed in separate locations of notes.

b. Additional Research. Attempt to ascertain as much cultural and geographical

knowledge on the text as possible.

c. Divisions into Major Sections. When the survey is complete, divide the book into

appropriate major divisions. Do not force divisions. Allow the divisions to be natural

and self evident. Divisions can usually be located by transitional or summary phrases.

d. Subdivide Major sections. Make subdivisions of the major categories titling them

appropriately. Like the divisions above, these divisions should be natural. Title these

sections with descriptive titles for later review and study.

e. Making the chart. Several methods can be used for making a chart to review

information. Some suggestions are vertical, horizontal, and spiral. The chart should

be concise enough that the entire book can be displayed on a single page. The

following are some important aspects of a chart.

i. The whole book at a glance

ii. The titles and references for each major division and subdivision

iii. The relative length of each division

f. Analyzation. Scrutinize, analyze, and meditate on each section, attacking it from

eleven different angles. The eleven (11) operations are:

1. Read for meaning

Begin making observations on each section by carefully reading the unit

for meaning. Read the unit as a whole unit, from beginning to end

without stopping several times. Then read it again as a unit several times


5

in different translations. Each time you read it, try to read it as though it

were your first time! Take time to meditate on the meaning and the main

point of the section. Endeavor not to overlook the obvious teachings of

the passage. The message that is in plain view is what you should see

first. Beware of the temptation to get more out of the text than is actually

there. Attempt to discover the one or two sentences which express the

one central thought or main point of the text. Ask yourself, what point did

the writer intend to stress here? What is the built-in emphasis? Keep the

entire section in mind as you scrutinize each part of it. Then, reread the

passage as a whole.

2. Outline the each section

Make a new outline of each section, reviewing thoughts, arguments and

main information and points. Allow the text to speak for itself.

3. Note the purpose of this section

4. Ask the six journalistic questions (Who, what, why, when, where and

how)

5. Note grammatical detail

6. Identify relationship

7. Reword the text

8. Paraphrase the section

9. List the main teachings

10. Condense each section

11. Test yourself on the content above

g. Topical Reading. Key words may illuminate the topic under investigation

h. Re-Construction

i. Interpretation


6

j. Application

k. Homiletic

D. Diagramming a Paragraph or Verse

The Biblical expositor committed to the literal interpretation of Scripture and sentence

diagramming provides two (2) invaluable services: It shows the basic structure of Biblical

passages, and it enables the expositor to construct an accurate outline.

1. Identify Genre

The easiest thing that a Bible Student can do to begin to build a better Hermeneutic

is to start reading individual passages of Scripture in their context, which can simply

mean reading what is written just before and just after it. The second thing that can

be done that will help to understand Scripture better is to identify which genre your

passage falls under. Different genres cause us to take different approaches to

interpretation.

2. Main Thought

3. Subordinate thoughts

4. Modifiers

5. Thought Flow

6. Grammatical Settings

7. Identify Biblical Sentence

II. Hermeneutic Techniques

A. Allegorical

An allegory is a figure of speech which contains a hidden or deeper spiritual meaning or

application. It is the symbolic representation of truth about God or man. Allegorical speech

is a tool whereby the writer or speaker conveys hidden or mysterious truths by the selective

use of words, which have literal meanings. Allegories are a legitimate literary tool in

communicating literal truth. Allegory is different from analogy in that allegory appeals to the

imagination. Analogy appeals to reason. Allegorical interpretation believes that one can

always look for the "real" or more "spiritual" meaning behind the obvious interpretation of

the text. In every allegory, there is a twofold sense. There is the immediate or historic,

which is understood from the natural meaning of the words, and the ultimate, which is

concerned with the things signified by the words.

Two modes of Allegorical Interpretation are found in dealing with the Bible. The first one is

symbolic or typological interpretation, derived mainly from Palestinian Jews. The other is


7

the philosophical or mystical modes originating with the Alexandrian Jews of Egypt. Allegory

also uses type and antitype extensively. The Biblical Authors themselves make extensive use

of the allegorical method of interpretation. Allegorical interpretation is not for the novice or

beginner.

Paul makes mention of this method of interpretation giving and example in his letter to the

Galatian Church (Gal. 4:24). Paul draws on the sons of Abraham and their mothers as an

allegorical interpretation of the text. This is the only place in Scripture where the word

“allegory” is used. One of the most allegorical texts of the Old Testament is the Book of

Ezekiel.

B. Spiritual

Much like the definition of the allegorical exegesis of Scripture, the spiritual method

assumes that the literal interpretation of the text is not the only possible way a text can be

interpreted. Spiritual exegesis, like allegorical interpretation of Biblical text requires

maturity and years of training and is not for the apprentice. Spiritual insights and

interpretations of Biblical text must be appropriately founded. Spiritual application must not

be confused with spiritual interpretation. Coercive interpretations seek to force listeners to

do something.

C. Devotional

Devotional use and interpretation of the Bible must be governed by the general rules of

Hermeneutics. Application must have a solid foundation upon which it stands. Devotional

Hermeneutics demands that we pay strict attention to the context of the passages we are

using to determine application. The Bible is a book of principles. It is more a book of

principles than specific directions. The concept behind Devotional interpretation is daily

living and application. Devotional Hermeneutics looks at the Biblical text searching for how

to apply the Scriptures to life. In all the interpretive methods of Biblical Hermeneutic the

Bible must be allowed to speak for itself.

Here we will point out three approached to Devotional Hermeneutics here.

1. Deductive Interpretation.

The question behind devotional Hermeneutics is how does the text apply to me?

The devotional aspect first asks “how can I walk out the text”?

2. Counseling.

Moses was the mediator between not only man and God but also man and man.

Counsellors must look at the Biblical text and find ways of instructing those they

counsel. Therefore, their approach is deductive and devotional. When the

Biblical Counsellor is locating, quoting or studying the Biblical text the meaning of

that text must never be forced


8

3. Promises

One area that many Believers love to look into as a devotional tool is the

promises of God. While this seems like a positive practice, we must maintain that

the context of the promise must be strictly adhered to before the promise can be

received. Simply being “in Christ” does not always qualify the Believer to receive

rewards that demand certain actions and behavior such as obedience. Claiming a

passage as a promise that is taken out of context will result in a loss of faith.

Before we can “claim” a promise or passage, we must first ascertain it scope.

D. Reason

The Rationalistic approach to Biblical Hermeneutics is much more critical than any other

method. This method viewed the Bible as if it were just another human document without

any Divine inspiration or authority. Rationalism relies on the intellect and logic of humanity

rather that viewing the Bible as a document that originated from God. Rationalism can be

defined as the assumption that human reason is the measure of all things. We must

maintain that the mind of degenerate man is incapable of discerning the truth of God’s

Word. Because it is not a natural document, the Spirit must be involved in its interpretation.

Without redemption, humanity is incapable of understanding the true intent of the Bible.

E. Literal

Many Christians today are committed strictly to the literal Hermeneutic method of

interpretation. The Literal Hermeneutic concludes that Biblical text can be interpreted from

the understanding of plain everyday living.

Biblical Hermeneutic has been caught between two basic schools of thought. The first is that

of Marcion and his heretical view of the Old Testament and God. The second school of

thought is that Origen and his super-elevation of the Old Testament. Marcion portrayed the

Old Testament in a diminutive fashion which reduced it to non-use. His view of the Old

Testament was so radical that he annulled its use. He used only the Book of John and a

select few of Paul’s writings as His Bible. Origen on the other hand almost excluded the New

Testament’s use. Neither of these two views is acceptable. We must contend that Biblical

data has one common thread of revelation throughout. During the Christian reformation,

this issue played a major part in the development of Hermeneutics. In contemporary

Christian history, these two schools still have their proponents. Bultmann represents the

Marcion heresy and Carl Barth represents the Origen view. Barth propagated a strictly

Christo-centric view of the Old Testament.

The clear unity of both Testaments must be argued. The unity of the two Testaments is

neither legalistic nor strictly Christo-centric. The fundamental premise of the Bible is the

progressive revelation of humanity’s redemption.

Therefore, the New Testament must not be divorced or alienated from its parent, the Old


9

Testament. The Old Testament looked forward to the redemption of humanity. This

revelation and expectation was realized in the New Testament.

Hermeneutics are the science and art of Biblical interpretation. It is a science because it is

guided by rules within a system. And, it is an art because the application of the rules is by

skill, and not by mechanical reproduction. This causes us to know that Hermeneutic

principles are not laws imposed upon Scripture. Hermeneutics interpret Scripture through

the normal methods of human communication. Hermeneutics apply to the universal laws of

human communication.

There are five principles involved in the Literal Method of Interpretation:

a. The Law of Context

b. The Law of Comparisons

c. The Law of Preference

d. Spelling, grammar and figure of speech must be given attention in

each passage.

e. God revealed Himself to man by means of man’s ways and culture.

The study of Biblical language will reveal normal grammatical meanings of Biblical text.

However, language can be encoded to contain special messages hidden within the text. This

may also be true of the Bible. To discover the literal meaning of any passage we must

understand the reason the author produced the original text.

Literal interpretation of the Bible must never negate the theological implications and

designs of the book. The Bible, as the Word of God, must be read as a whole. It has

collective harmony. No passage of Scripture, correctly interpreted, will contradict another

passage. All apparent contradictions are the result of our misunderstandings concerning the

Biblical text.

The language of the Bible itself requires literal interpretation. The Biblical text demonstrates

that the text was communicated and understood literally. The Literal method of

interpretation is a system for judging the interpretive skills of men.

Literal Interpretation does not exclude the Figurative. Figurative and symbolic meanings can

be produced from literal text. Literal Interpretation does not exclude the Spiritual meaning.

Because God is a Spirit, His language and speech are Spiritual.

Therefore, His Book, the Bible, is filled with Spiritual content. Spiritual meanings in no way

negate literal meanings.

Literal Interpretation does not exclude the Allegorical meanings. By excluding the possibility

of allegorical interpretation, it would be impossible to see the multitude of Messianic

pictures available in the Bible.

F. Covenantal

In Scripture, the central paradigm of the saving relationship with God is the covenant motif.

It is clear that the Biblical canon presents God consistently, as a personal Being who


10

interacts personally with those beings created in His image. In Christ, God reveals His

personhood in historical and experiential ways. The Old Testament sacrificial system, which

was used in part to accomplish atonement between God and Israel, found its expression in

the context of the covenant. The basic character of Old Testament religion was

interpersonal. Every breach of this Law was a personal offence against this God whose

concern and love had been so explicitly expressed. These beaches in the Covenant were

solved through the daily sacrificial system as a daily covenantal renewal. Communion with

God was mediated through the rite of sacrifice.

Indeed all humanity (Rom. 1:18—3:20), finds itself in desperate need for a means of

restoration to God’s fellowship. As the basis of reconciliation, the atonement provides the

means for this to occur. Furthermore, since all sin is essentially relational, the overcoming of

the curse of sin must involve personal and relational means.

In Biblical terms, the covenant is the prime agency of God's self-revelation in history. God

reveals Himself to be the covenant God. The essence of the covenant between God and man

is "I will be your God, and you will be My people." An understanding of the covenant is

central to understanding the history of redemption. Covenant Hermeneutics is that system

of theology which recognizes the successive covenants of Scripture as a unity, and the

means by which God brings order to His creation and brings about redemption for His

elect." The Bible originates with a revelation of the covenantal aspects of God in relationship

to humanity. To understand God’s person and works properly, we must see Him in light of

the covenant He has made and fulfills with His people. The various covenants, of which we

read in the Old Testament, were all covenants of promise, including the covenant of law

established through Moses. From the perspective of Paul, all of the Biblical covenants,

whether made with Abraham, Moses, or David, were elaborations of the one, single, basic

promise of God. Therefore, although there were many covenants made throughout the Old

Testament, it is Biblically accurate to view them as explanations of a single promise of God.

Every promise in the covenants was affirmed and confirmed in the person and work of

Christ. Christ is the model of that righteousness revealed in the Mosaic Law (Matt. 5:17;

Rom 10:4; Heb. 4:15; 1 John 2:5-6), as well as, the true and perfect, atoning sacrifice for

sinners, which required in the Mosaic Covenant (Heb. 9). Subsequent covenants do not

conflict with each other but complement and expand upon previous motifs and promises.

All of the promises of God's covenants center on Christ and His redemptive work. We must

recognize the unity and continuity of God's covenantal administrations.

Suzerainty Treaties

The standard treaty-form in the ancient world was structured in five parts, all of

which appear in the Biblical covenants: Preamble, Historical Prologue, Ethical

Stipulations, Sanctions, and Succession Arrangements. One of the best examples of a

document written in this treaty-form is the Book of Deuteronomy. Several unique


11

features of the Suzerainty Treaty may shed more light on the Mosaic Covenant. First,

the treaty made a distinction between those who were parties to the treaty and

those who were not. It reminds us that the covenant with Moses was designed to

help the recipients enjoy the blessings promised under the Abrahamic covenant. The

stipulations provided guidelines in maintaining the relationship and indicated what

was expected of one in covenant relationship with God. Legalism has absolutely no

place in a covenantal relationship with God. Remember that all must enter into such

a relationship in the same way that Abraham did. He was chosen by the grace of God

apart from any merit on his part. In fact, God did not even choose him because of

any foreseen faith that Abraham might exercise in the future; He made a sovereign

choice based on His own criteria, not on anything within man.

When an individual enters the Kingdom of God by faith, he also enters the

Abrahamic Covenant. The covenant with Moses was not one through which a person

could begin a relationship with God. It was, rather, a covenant wherein the Believer

enjoyed his relationship with God through his obedience.

Another characteristic of the Suzerainty Treaties is that the treaty/covenant implies

the existence of a community. God did not make the Mosaic Covenant with a single

individual, but with a nation. This nation was bound together with a common

purpose and will. Moreover, the purpose and will of this nation was to be in

complete harmony with God’s purpose and will. The covenant was meant to help

facilitate that end. In order for it to function properly, the whole community of God’s

people had to be united in living that covenant.

A third characteristic of the Suzerainty Treaty is love. This is a crucial aspect of a

covenant relationship, which, few have grasped in regard to the Mosaic Covenant. As

Deuteronomy 7:7-11 and 10:15 make abundantly clear; love is what motivated God

to make the covenant at Sinai. Jesus spoke about such love in John 14:15: “If you

love Me, you will keep My commandments” He was directing His teaching to the

portion of the remnant of Israel whom He was training to reach their fellow Israelites

and the nations for Him. The natural expression of that love is to live out our new

life, in Him, through the stipulations, laws, and decrees of the Mosaic Covenant.

Because He always relates to His people through a covenant, this applies to

everyone whom He calls His own.

Let us examine one last characteristic of the Ancient Near Eastern suzerainty

treaties: the provision for renewal. When the covenant makers died and new

generations took over, covenants were often renewed. When a covenant was

renewed, the stipulations were sometimes altered to fit the needs of the generation

that was renewing the covenant. However, one covenant does not set aside another;

one does not invalidate another so as to nullify its stipulations. Rather, it renews,

expands, adapts, and updates. This is the point Paul makes in Galatians 3:l7.


12

Covenant and Atonement

The term “Atonement” can mean “make expiation,” “wipe away,” “forgive,”

“appease,” or “propitiate,”. “Expiation” focuses on the removal of the sin, which

incurred God’s wrath, and this is usually done through sacrifice. The Biblical writers

portray God as the One who initiates. God’s forgiveness at all levels was conditioned

upon the repentance of the sinner and this involved a contrite confession of sin Lev.

5:5. The sacrificial acts were not effective unless they were accompanied by true

repentance. God’s forgiveness was conditioned upon the sinner’s repentance Lev.

5:5.

G. Symbolic

Biblical Symbology is a method of communication where a symbol is used to convey a

thought or concept. Etymologists suggest that the alphabet was originally constructed from

a group of symbols. The Bible is filled with symbols. These symbols are often the key to

interpreting the intent of a book or verse. The word “symbol” means to throw together or

to compare. The difference between types and symbols is that types have a specific antitype

and symbols are often signs. Symbols often speak in metaphoric terms and language.

Because of the flexibility of the symbol, we must be careful not to make the above

mentioned definitions to strict. Symbols do not always fit normative rules. Symbols have a

basis in reality. The Tabernacle of Moses is a good picture of the uses of such symbols.

Symbols include: numbers, natural materials, colors, people, names, titles, directions,

places, creatures, and actions.

Hermeneutic Principles

a. Comparative Interpretation

b. Reference and Characteristics

c. Diversity of Symbols

d. Prophetic Symbols

e. Numeric Symbologies

f. Doctrine

Doctrine should be built upon solid Hermeneutic principles and not

vague symbols.

H. Parabolic

Parables are short stories that are told in order to make a specific point. Parables often rely

on human circumstances to convey spiritual truth. Most Scholars believe that the Old

Testament contains more allegories than the New Testament. This is due to the extensive


13

Christo-centric content of the Old Testament. Although Christ employed the parable as a

means of inculcating His message more extensively and more effectively than any other

teacher, He did not invent the parable. It was His custom, in general, to take over from the

religious and linguistic world of thought in His own day. The parable was a very common

tool of teaching among the first century Jews. The Midrash is a commentary totally devoted

to parabolic stories.

In order to accurately interpret parables, we must try to hear the parable as the original

audience did. The interpreter must realize how the places and objects used in the parable

affected the audience. Parables must be interpreted within the total reference points of

comparison so the focus remains on the central meaning of the parable. Some scholars have

suggested the following purpose for parabolic teachings; reveal truth to Believers, conceal

the truth from unbelievers, and presents new truth concerning God’s Kingdom.

Some scholars suggest to interpret a parable is to destroy a parable. A parable without

interpretation is a parable without power. Without interpretation, the parabolic meaning

and plot is lost. We must remember that the Biblical parable must cross cultural and

historical boundaries in order to make its point. Determining the audience is specifically

important in determining the intent of the parable. Old Testament Parables and Proverbs

are used as metaphor or a simile. By understanding parabolic structure, we will be more

readily able to ascertain parabolic type. Parables often have a basic structure. This structure

is most often found in the language, meter, and rhyme used to convey the story. Each

parable has a specific point or plot that it used to make its point. Here are some helpful

hints for determining parabolic types of speech; narrative style, look for change, points of

reference, identify patterns, and identify relationships.

Parables are like mini-dramas. The plot and lesson of the parable, made during any phase of

the parables presentation, must be noted. Parables have a unique way of remaining an

intricate part of our memory. When a parable is seated in the conscience, it will help

produce the ethical result desired by its author. Parabolic doctrine must be the result of

authentic scriptural teaching. We must take great care not to build doctrine on isolated

incidents and texts. Scholars suggest that parables have no place in doctrine. Any Scripture

that supports established Biblical doctrine cannot be divorced from its parental place within

Biblical text.

I. Prophetic

Prophecy and Eschatology are specialized fields that require a great deal of time to

understand. Every interpretation of Scripture must proceed from the natural meaning of the

text without having to force the meaning into a category, genre or specific filed of study. We

must maintain that a great danger occurs when the Biblical student approaches the study of

Prophecy and Eschatology from a deductive approach. The Biblical text must be inductively

studied thoroughly, before any conclusion can be ascertained. Prophecy is often poetic and


14

ancient poetry, like modern poetry, uses words in a metaphoric or symbolic sense more

often than the prose method does. We need to see what the prophecy meant to the people

to whom it was given. Emphasis on prophecy must be properly directed, and balanced

within the entire Biblical message. The key to understanding why certain prophecies and

prophetic events transpired can only be ascertained from the cultural, historical background

of the text.

Regarding Eschatology we should know that there are four school of thought on this matter;

Amillennialism, Post- millennialism, Pre-millennialism, and Dispensationalism.

Now, the five important principles of a good Prophetic Hermeneutic:

1. Seek to understand the author/Author's intended meaning.

2. All Scripture must be taken in its proper context.

3. Always compare Scripture with other Scripture.

4. Determine the literal references of figures of speech that provide comparison,

substitution, and amplification.

5. Recognize the near/far implications and applications in prophetic passages.

If we are to understand Biblical prophecy, or any other part of Scripture, we must approach

the Bible with humility, relying on the Holy Spirit, with the conviction that God's Word is

true and cannot contradict itself.

III. Historical Development of Hermeneutics

The history of Hermeneutics is older than Biblical text.

A. Jewish Hermeneutics

The Bible is a book written by Jews primarily to Jews. The Bible is a Jewish book. It was

written against the backdrop of their language, traditions, culture and lifestyle. Because the

book is Jewish, we must realize that the Jews have the oldest system of Hermeneutics in

practice to this very day. The system initiated by the Jews may very well have originated

with Ezra, the Prophet, Priest and Scribe. Some Scholars have even called him the “Father of

Hermeneutics.” In the Book of Nehemiah, chapter eight verses one though eight, we have

the first record of Hermeneutics in practice. This verse states the essence of what

Hermeneutics is all about.

1. Literal School

The School of Hermeneutics, which is said to have originated with Ezra, was a school

of literal interpretation. The Jews translated and interpreted God on their arm and

forehead.

2. Diaspora

The Jews of post-exile were scattered throughout the world. This caused the Jews, in

various parts of the globe, to need translation in their own language. Not only did

the need translations, they needed a system of Hermeneutics. Major centers for


15

Jews developed competing systems of Hermeneutics. It is for this reason that there

are two Talmuds. One is the Jerusalem Talmud and the other is the Babylonian

Talmud. It may have been Ezra who set the books of the Old Testament in order. He

divided the Old Testament into three sections. The first section was the Torah or

Law. The second section was that of the prophetic writings. The final sections were

the sacred writings such as Psalms and other such writings. These three divisions

were abbreviated into an acronym called the “Tanakh.” The “Ta” was for the writings

of Moses or the Torah. The “Na” was for the writings of the Prophets or the

“Neviim.” The final section “Kh” was for the Ketuvim or the writings. The Jerusalem

school played a prominent role in Jewish writings until the destruction of Jerusalem

in 70 A.D.

The three major influences on Jewish Hermeneutics were: Israeli Schools, Babylonian

Schools, and Alexandrian Schools. The Alexandrian Schools were very diverse from

the Babylonian and Israeli Academies. This is because the Alexandrian Schools were

heavily influenced by Grecian thought and philosophy. The Septuagint was created

because they refused to maintain their use of Hebrew. While a Greek philosophy and

thought heavily influenced the Alexandrian Jews, there were those students from

these schools that did excel and impact Judaism and the interpretation of God’s

Word profoundly. Philo is one such individual. His writings are accepted by Jew and

Christian alike in this contemporary age. An outstanding Alexandrian Jew of the New

Testament was Stephen. He was well versed in the Scriptures and possessed deep

revelation into the role and power of Jesus, as Messiah.

3. The Role and History of the Scribe

Those who played a major role in interpreting Word of God were the Scribes. Ezra is

a perfect example of a godly Scribe. The Scribes employed such means as counting

words and letters to guarantee authenticity. The history of the Scribes is divided into

five periods, indicated by the names given to Scribes during successive times. The

following is a list of those historic divisions; the Sopherim, the Tanaim, the Amoraim,

the Saboraim, and the Gaonim.

4. Ezra’s Reforms

Ezra is the originator of institutions known as "the regulations of Ezra." It appears to

have been Ezra who made a scheduled reading of God’s Word. During the time of

Christ, the Torah was read on a triennial basis. Ezra played a strict part in the

holiness of the Israeli nation. Ezra was responsible for a revival of holiness. Because

Ezra read and explained the Biblical text, we have in Ezra an example of early

expository preaching In this sense Ezra is the prototype of Biblical expositors. It is

evident that detailed exegesis was part of the scribal expertise. According to


16

Rabbinic tradition, Ezra introduced many basic tenets out of which the "Great

Synagogue" and its preaching developed. Centuries later, the early

Church borrowed much of its polity, order of worship, and even it’s preaching from

the Synagogue. According to Moses, the purpose for this reading was "in order that

they [the people] may hear and learn and fear the Lord your God, and be careful to

observe all the words of this law" (Deut 31:12b). To hear, learn, fear, and do what is

written: this is the passion of expository preaching. Ezra demonstrated a threefold

proclamation of God’s Word. That proclamation was expressed by commitment,

study and practice. He did not emphasize the law as an end in itself; rather, he was

convinced that the covenant community needed to return to God by taking seriously

his revelation and applying it to every aspect of life.

5. The Synagogue

The assemblies of Ezra were undoubtedly Synagogues of some sort or measure. The

exact origin of the Synagogue is uncertain. Some Scholars place the invention of the

Synagogue in the hands of Moses, others Ezra and still others Joshua. The term

Synagogue is Greek meaning “gathering.” Hebrew names for these gatherings

include “Kehilah” and “Edah.” The term “Edah” seems to encompass the whole

community, while the term Kahal is a local gathering or assembly. Regardless of its

initial institution, the Synagogue came to power and prominence during the

Babylonian Exile. Of primary importance within the Synagogue was the study and

interpretation of God’s Word. Studies into the structure and organization of the

Synagogue show that not one single individual was responsible for the guidance of

the assembly.

6. Rabbinic Hermeneutics

The approach of the varying Rabbis can be seen in the Mishnah or the Talmud. Two

points of understanding are of great importance when reviewing Rabbinic

Hermeneutics; Purpose that was the understanding of how to walk out the

commands of God, and Oral Torah. The Oral Torah said three thins; “be deliberate in

judgment; raise up disciples; and make a fence around Torah. “ The Oral Torah

played a major role in the interpretation of the Scriptures within the Jewish

Hermeneutic system.

Hillel’s Seven Rules

It suffices to say here that the School of thought created by Hillel was

acceptable to two major New Testament figures. The first being Christ,

Himself and the second, being Paul.

Rules codified by Hillel


17

1) Light and Heavy

2) Equivalence of Expression

3) Building of the Father from one Text

4) Building of the father from two (2) or more Texts

5) The General and Particular

6) Analogy from another Passage

7) Explanation obtained from context

7. Rabbinic Schools

There were two schools of the Pharisees. These two schools were contrary to one

another. One school, the Shammaites, was strict legalists. They demanded the

observance of the Law to the strictest letter. The other school, the Hillelites, sought

to follow the intent or “spirit of the Law”. Both Jesus and Paul were students of the

latter school. These schools were called "houses." Shammai School was the school of

Jerusalem the Galilean area was accustomed to the teachings of Hillel. Shammai

consistently pushed the Mosaic Law to an unbearable extreme and no heed given to

the practical reform that was really needed in Jewish morals. It was the school of

Shammai rather than the school of Hillel, which Christ predominantly condemned.

8. Apostolic

The Apostolic method of Hermeneutics had its primary foundation in Rabbinic

Hermeneutics. Tanakh formed the foundation for all apostolic exposition and homilies.

While studying this historical process, one must not lose sight of the fact that the Messianic

Community did not come about as the product of literary activities. Nor did they see

themselves imprisoned by written words. On the one hand the Messianic Christians

interpreted the sacred books of their ancestors in a new light derived from their faith in

Christ. The key to all Apostolic Hermeneutics was the person and work of Christ. Their

Hermeneutics were very much Christo-centric. One of the reasons understanding the

apostolic approach to Scripture is so important is that fact that many of the apostolic

teachings were canonized as the New Testament. The Disciples followed the teaching of

Christ and used them as a Hermeneutic foundation for their interpretation of Scripture. Paul

had to learn to approach the Scriptures with a Messianic Hermeneutic. Paul applied his

Hermeneutics to the Hebrew text and proved Christ’s validity and role. Be very careful in

interpreting Paul’s letters. Ask first and foremost why he wrote the letter, and what

argument is he making. His argument will reveal the opposition that Paul was making.

Above all, Paul was trying to maintain and develop a balanced Hermeneutic in his audience.

The Christo-centric principle of Hermeneutics produced great revelation and devotion to

Christ. In the practice of Apostolic Hermeneutics, the Scriptures did not only serve as tools

by which Christian truth was demonstrated. The relationship was mutual. The acceptance of


18

Christ in faith provided also a key for understanding the Scriptures. The Early Church taught,

without hesitation and ambiguity, the Divine Authority of the Old Testament. Scripture is

the Word of God and as such it "cannot lose its validity" (Jn 10:35). Also key to

understanding Apostolic Hermeneutics is their projected purpose and intent of the Old

Testament. Paul establishes a view of the Old Testament’s role in the life of New Testament

Believers. We can see this in 2Ti 3:16-17.

Hermeneutics of the Church Fathers

The big theological questions over which Christians struggled in the first four centuries were

about the nature of God and about the person of Christ. How could God become man? And

how could a man be both God and man?

1. Heresies

Here are the three major heresies that the Church Fathers faced; Greek Philosophy, the

Deity of Christ, and the validity of the Old Testament. These heresies of the day sealed his

commitment to allegory. The Gnostic sects rejected the Old Testament on the grounds that

it taught a different God than the one revealed in Christ. They believed that in contrast to

the New Testament God of love, the Deity of the Old Testament was vengeful, jealous,

capricious, and often directly responsible for sin and evil.

2. Major Practices

Historical data shows that the Church Fathers certainly emulated apostolic practice and the

Christo-centric interpretation. One particular approach, which apparently developed in the

Jewish community of Alexandria, was that of Philo. It is not surprising, therefore, that a Jew

such as Philo, antecedently committed to the Bible as the Word of God on account of his

Jewish background. The important thing to Philo was the philosophical and allegorical based

Hermeneutics.

It has been recorded that the allegorical method of Hermeneutic was used extensively by

Origen. Origen firmly believed that the Bible was the Word of God, and one of the major

concerns was to assist Christians facing the intellectual challenges of the third century by

providing scriptural answers to the questions posed by Hellenistic philosophy and culture.

He maintained that the Bible contained three levels of meaning: the body level, the psychic

level, and the spiritual level. Origen assumed that there should be some correspondence

between the literal and allegorical meanings of Scripture. Generally, for the allegorical to be

true, the literal should be.

Medieval

The Medieval period was a period of little activity or advancement for the Church and

Hermeneutics. Medieval theologians said that the text could be read in a four-fold way: the

literal sense, the moral sense, the allegorical sense, and the anagogical sense.


19

Reformation Hermeneutics

Luther, and then Calvin, along with the other Reformers, abandoned allegorical

interpretation and went back to looking for the natural historical meaning of the Old

Testament. As they did so, they also recovered the historical Gospel, restored justification as

the basis of sanctification, and moved grace from the heart of the Believer back into the

heart of God. The Reformation's Hermeneutical principles came out of what the Bible said,

and so the Gospel returned to being the key to proper interpretation.

Post Reformation Hermeneutics

1. Pietism

Pietism’s interpretation often concentrates on the emotional more than the

truth.

2. Criticism

The Enlightenment led to various developments in the business of

interpreting the Bible. Once the theory of interpretation was divorced from

Divine revelation in the Bible, working out what the Bible said came to

bethought of as a matter of human scientific advances

3. Rationalism

Those in this group believe that whatever is not in harmony with educated

mentality was to be rejected. This movement stressed that the human

intellect can decide what is true and false. The Bible, then, is true if it

corresponds to man's reason, and what does not correspond can be ignored.

This led to radical criticism of the Scriptures, as mentioned above and laid the

basis for liberal theology.

Modern Hermeneutics

Modern secular Scholars often viewed the Bible as no more than a record of the

evolutionary development of Israel and the Church rather than God's revelation

of Himself to man. The following list is an overview of the history of recent Hermeneutic.

1. Subjectivism

i. Divine Authority of Scripture

ii. Existentialism

Soren Kierkegaard a Danish philosopher, known as "The father

of modern existentialism," related reason to the lowest level

of human operation. He rejected Christendom and its formal

rationalism and cold creedalism, and taught that faith is a

subjective experience in one's moment of despair.

2. Historical Criticism


20

i. Literary Hermeneutics

ii. The Tubigen School

According to F.C Bauer, the founder of the "Tubigen

School," Christianity developed gradually from Judaism

into a world religion. Influenced by Hegel (thesis,

antithesis, synthesis), he taught that Peter and Paul

directed two antagonistic groups; but they were finally

synthesized in the ancient Catholic Church. The

Tubigen School attempted to reconcile the church's

teaching with philosophy and Biblical studies. Bauer

fathered distinct strands of Biblical Theologies found in

the New Testament and reemphasized the historical

understanding of the Bible.

iii. De-supernaturalized Jesus

David F. Strauss took a mythological approach to the

Bible, which resulted in his denying

grammatical-historical interpretation and miracles

iv. Documentary Hypothesis

1. Documentary Hypothesis

2. Old Testament Historical Development

3. Exegetical Commentators

4. Liberalism

5. Orthodoxy

6. Neo-Orthodoxy

Karl Barth (1886-1968) in his Commentary on

Romans stressed that the Bible is not a human

document, that God is transcendent not

immanent, and that man is a sinner.

Neo-orthodox leaders include Emil Brunner

(1889-1966) and Reinhold Neibuhr. These

successors of Barth believed that God speaks

through the Bible in Divine-human encounters

and thus, it becomes the Word of God. To

them, the Bible is a record of and witness to

revelation, not revelation itself

7. Bultmannism

Under the influence of Heidegaer's

existentialism, he teaches that the New

Testament should be understood existentially


21

by eliminating from it those mythological

"foreign" elements such as miracles, including

the resurrection of Christ, which is

unacceptable today. Bultmann followed the

Marcion heresy that portrayed the Old

Testament in a diminutive fashion which

reduced it to non-use.

8. Canonical Criticism

The goal of canonical criticism is to understand

how the passage reflects and interacts with the

foundational beliefs of a given community or

tradition.

9. Sociological Criticism

10. Deconstructionism

IV. The Holy Spirit and Hermeneutics

One definition given to the word “Hermeneutics“ is: “the message of the Spirit.” The word

“Hermeneutic” is a compound word from two Greek words hermes and pneuma. Hermes

was the messenger of the mythological gods. Pneuma is the Greek word for Spirit.

Therefore, Hermeneutics bears the meaning of, the “message of the Spirit.” Recent

Scholarship has realized and determined that the Bible is a spiritual book. Therefore, as a

spiritual book, it has spiritual content. Any view of the Holy Spirit’s role in the interpretation

must be based upon the Biblical text. To simply claim that an interpretation is authoritative”

because it was “inspired” by the Holy Spirit is inadequate. The role of the Spirit in Biblical

Hermeneutics must be controlled and weighed by the Biblical text itself and adequate

Hermeneutic techniques. Interpreting the Scripture, by means of the Holy Spirit, is older

than the Church. However, Scripture is clear to point out that Spiritual Hermeneutics are not

Systematic Hermeneutics. Those who accept the Holy Spirit’s role in Biblical Interpretation

are more ready to accept Biblical miracles as being authentic. Those who embrace the

Spirit’s activity in Biblical Hermeneutics have a more supernatural and or spiritual worldview

than those who do not. The most promising Hermeneutic is one that has consulted

Systematic Hermeneutics and the insight of the Holy Spirit.

1. Inspiration

Inspiration requires the supernatural agent of the Holy Spirit upon the writers of the Sacred

Text. Inspiration is the voice of the Spirit dictating truth to an individual for record.

2. Revelation

The word “revelation” means, “to uncover or unveil.” Where inspiration is the authoring of


22

the text; revelation is the disclosure of that text. During the Biblical times, revelation came

to man through various methods. Those methods were; the Spoken Word, Dreams, Visions,

through the Spirit, Scripture. Contrary to past revelations, the tool or standard to weigh

modern revelation by is the Word of God. There are three well-marked modes of revelation,

which we may designate; external manifestation, internal suggestion, and concursive

operation. Dreams may seem to us little fitted to serve as vehicles of Divine

communications. But there is no suggestion in Scripture that revelations through dreams

stand on a lower plane than any others. We should bear in mind that the intellectual or

spiritual quality of a revelation is not derived from the recipient, but from its Divine Giver.

It is clear that God directly intervenes in the affairs of humanity by manifesting His Divine

revelations as a series of raw communication between God and man. God spoke to Moses

face to face, not in dark speeches (Num 12:8). Throughout the whole history of revelation

down to the appearance of Jesus to Paul on the road to Damascus, God has shown Himself

visibly or through the varying modes of revelation to His servants; whenever it has seemed

good to Him to do so. Just as He has used Theophanies, He has spoken with them in

objective speech. However, it is not merely the mouths of men with which God thus serves

Himself in the delivery of His messages, but their hearts and minds as well.

Contemporary Revelation

It should be noted that contemporary revelation must incorporate the Spirit and be

weighed against scriptural standards.

1. Enlightenment

Paul tells the Assembly at Ephesus that he wishes for the eyes of their

understanding to receive enlightenment (Ep.1:18). Here, Paul uses the

eye is as a symbol of the inner man. He is not discussing mysticism or

Gnostic religions. Here, Biblical dictionaries point out the metaphoric use

of the eye as a spiritual capacity to discern, know and receive revelation.

This spiritual enlightening is the product of the Spirit of God, which the

Spirit brings about through the Divine Word (Ps 119:130; 2Ti3:15; 2Pe

1:19). Spiritual sight and hearing has to do with our ability to receive the

true intent of the Biblical Message, as presented by the Spirit. There is

always a spiritual and mystical side to Biblical practices. By reducing these

experiences to perfunctory observance, we become Saduceean in our

walk with God.

2. Discernment

Discernment has two basic sides. The first is the unmasking of illusion.

The enemy employs the use of God’s Word as a tool to draw us into sin.

His use of a lie in association with the truth of God’s Word confounds the

human soul. The second is the spiritual ability to obtain deeper spiritual

wisdom especially from the Biblical Text. Both abilities are spiritual. The


23

writer of the Letter to the Messianic Hebrews suggests that the more

mature a Christian is, the more he should be able to function in this ability

(He 5:14).

The Relationship between the Spirit and Interpretation

1. Cognition and Conviction

2. Practical Understanding

3. Observance and Knowledge

4. Truth Begets Truth

Man is an active agent in the projection, presentation and reception of God’s Word.

Receiving God’s Word through the agent of the Spirit will always insure that there is

authentic accuracy and contextual application. Furthermore, spiritual insight will insure

liberty. There is a gradual, but progressive contraction that characterizes the Spirit's activity

from His universal work in creation, to being the Spirit, “in Christ.” Therefore, from this

focus upon the Christ Jesus, within His completed work of redemption, the Spirit's

functional expansion proceeds progressively from the Spirit, “in Christ” to the universal

proclamation of the Gospel of Christ. This began with the Jewish-Christian Apostles at

Pentecost, when Peter recognized the universal implications of the Old Testament

prophecies and promises concerning the Spirit and declared to his hearers: "to you is the

promise, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God

shall call unto Him"(Acts 2:39).

This doctrine mandates the regeneration of the exegete. It must be further stated that

relying on the “Spirit” to interpret and reveal the Scriptures do not take the place of genuine

Biblical study and Hermeneutic practices. This is not because the Holy Spirit is not

trustworthy. It is because the mind of man is not a reliable source. Trusting upon the “Spirit”

must always be used in combination with the best possible Hermeneutic principles. Before

the Spirit can assist the human mind in the Hermeneutic process, the human mind must be

associated with the Word of God and Hermeneutic principles. The Holy Spirit can use

accumulated Biblical knowledge and bring forth the intended meaning of Scripture. We

must concede that the Holy Spirit is the Author and inspiration of the Scriptures. Because

the Spirit is the Divine Author of the Biblical text it seems appropriate that He would be the

likely candidate to help with the interpretation of Scripture. We must realize that the Bible

is requisite to our understanding the Will and plan of God for humanity. The Holy Spirit is

qualified to make full use of the Biblical text, being its Author. As the Biblical author, the

Spirit uses the tools that He has established to teach, lead and guide us in the truth of God.

The Bible demonstrates Christ’s extensive use of the Bible, as a means for teaching and

instructing His Disciples. Jesus appeals to the Bible as the standard for living and daily life.

The tools common to both Christ and the Spirit was the Word of God. The Bible is an ethical

moral book. Therefore, it teaches us how to conduct ourselves within certain circumstances


24

that require this type of knowledge.

v. Doctrinal and Theological Hermeneutics

What is Doctrine? Doctrine is a principle, position or the body of principles in a branch of

knowledge or in a system of belief. The Doctrinal content of the Word of God gives guideline

for understanding the Word of God.

All systems of Biblical Hermeneutic are subject to Systematic Hermeneutic except for

Spiritual Hermeneutics. The main burden of doctrinal teaching must rest on a genuine

interpretation of the Biblical text. Doctrinal conflicts often stem from historical differences

and disagreements within the Church. Spiritual maturity and stability require understanding

the nature of these doctrinal differences. The theologian must not extend his doctrines

beyond scriptural evidence. A doctrine that is clearly supported by the analogy of faith

cannot be contradicted by a contrary and obscure passage. Obscure and doubtful passages

are to be interpreted in the light of clear passages.

While it is true that the systematic principles of Hermeneutics are never explicitly taught in

the Bible, they are taught implicitly. Giving names to the Hermeneutic principles does not go

beyond the teachings of the Bible. Rather, it serves only to organize them better. The

Biblical text does not exist to prove or disprove theologies and doctrine. Doctrine and

theology are the result of thorough Biblical study not the reverse.

Apostolic Doctrine

The earliest teaching of the Apostles consisted essentially of three propositions:

i. That Jesus was the Messiah

ii. That He was risen from the dead

iii. That Salvation was by faith in His name

Paul admonishes Timothy to meditate upon the things that he had taught him and to

hold them as doctrine (1Ti 4:15-16). Here the Biblical use of the word doctrine

means, “A teaching”. The “teaching” that Timothy received was concerning the Old

Testament revelation of Christ. These teachings given to Timothy, by Paul, formed a

“Doctrine.”

In Greek Theology, “doctrine” and “dogma” meant the same thing. Each had its

origin in the opinion of some great teacher; each rested upon revelation and claimed

its authority. Each meant an exposition of a particular truth of the Gospel, and of the

whole Christian truth. Dogmatic Hermeneutics came into existence during the dark

ages, when speculators and Christian philosophers were the only guides of the

people. These were soon found to differ from each other.

The Apologetic Method

The Apologetic method maintains the absolute perfection of all statements in the


25

Bible. It was brought into being by the Rationalistic Method of Hermeneutics

mentioned before. We must be careful in using this approach because it can often be

unreasonable. With the Apologetic method, we learn to question the Bible and

determine who is talking

Theological Hermeneutics

Biblical Hermeneutics is the determination of the intent and meaning of the Biblical

text. Therefore, Theological Hermeneutics must determine the accuracy of

theologies. The greatest danger we face in Theological Hermeneutics, much like

Doctrinal Hermeneutics, is the opinions and views of men. One of the greatest

difficulties faced in Historic Theology is that many theologies were the views of men

rather than God or the Bible.

Historically speaking, the Bible has often been theologically and hermeneutically

abused. We must insure that these abuses cease and solid theologies are derived

from scripturally substantiated Hermeneutics. The inductive method of

Hermeneutics has long been used in almost all departments of investigation except

that of theology.

Biblical Theology takes the Bible Student one step further in his studies. Theology

allows the Bible student to begin to ascertain the value, purpose and significance of

the Biblical text.

Biblical Theology aims at determining the scriptural message of the text. The Biblical

theological method elucidates the truth that revelation is progressive and that

various authors may speak of various truths from different perspectives. Having this

understanding, we must not try to read later revelation into earlier revelation, or try

to make every author out to be saying the same exact thing as a different author

writing on the same topic.

Systematic Theology

Theology also makes Biblical themes more readily memorable. Theology can help

mnemonic recall of Biblical text. The mind works as a system, systematizing all

incoming data into an understandable framework and grid through which to make

sense of the world, and through which to interpret other incoming data. All

Christians have certain beliefs about God, and those beliefs are arranged in a

systematic fashion as well. Therefore, every Christian has a form of systematic

theology.

Many of these same theologians advocate Biblical Theology as the preferred method

of doing Theology. Biblical Theology is an approach to Biblical interpretation that

recognizes revelation as progressive. Biblical Theology interprets each passage in

light of each author's understanding from his particular vantage point in the history


26

of revelation, understanding his words in his own particular thought forms and

categories. Our attempt to develop a systematic understanding of Scripture is both

natural and good, but we must beware lest the system we develop be viewed as the

teaching of Scripture itself. Our Biblical Theology attempts to understand the

meaning of the existing pieces, while our systematic Theology attempts to

understand how they cohere together in unity, and to visualize the missing pieces

based on the existing pieces. Let us never believe that the gaps we have attempted

to fill through our systematic Theology are the teachings of Scripture itself. All too

often, we pass off our systematic understanding of the Biblical statements as the

absolute teaching of Scripture, when indeed, such is not the case.

Our theological system can, should, and will inform our exegesis. Since it is

impossible to interpret the Scripture apart from our prior understandings, we must

use our systematic theology to the best of its ability to aid us in the process. Those

who claim they do not allow their systematic theology and presuppositions to aid

them in the interpretive process are deceiving themselves, for they must do it

whether they wish to or not.

VI. Principles of Hermeneutics

A. First Mention

The “law of first-mention” is the principle in the interpretation of Scripture which states that

the first mention or occurrence of a subject in Scripture establishes an unchangeable

pattern, with that subject remaining unchanged in the mind of God throughout Scripture.

1. The meaning of the law of First Mention

This view and Hermeneutic Principle readily assumes the Bible to be a collective

whole. By understanding that the Bible is a unified whole, we are able to follow this

principle and determine subsequent uses of themes, terms, phrases and concepts.

The idea is that subsequent use usually builds upon the foundation of First-Mention.

i. Historical Development

ii. Historical Use

iii. Fundamental use

2. The Rules of First-Mention

Locate First-Mention

Foundational Understanding

Subsequent Mention

B. Christo-Centric Principle

The phrase Christo-centric means that Christ is the center. Here, the focal point is not only

Christ but also His ministry and eternal occupation.

1. Christ in the Old Testament


27

Obviously, the Messianic concept originated with the Old Testament. Scholars have

noted that there are more than three hundred Messianic references found in the Old

Testament. The Christian faith has been adequately established for millennia. We do not

need to read Christo-centric principles into the text unnecessarily. The fact of Christ

stands upon solid Biblical Exegetical Hermeneutic practices. It is not necessary to read

unwarranted Christo-centric Hermeneutics into unwelcome texts.

Christian Scholars believe the first Messianic mention to be found in Genesis 3:15.

However, Rabbinic Scholarship notes that Genesis 1:2 is in fact the first mention of

Messiah. This passage notes the darkness that covers the earth. It further notes that the

Spirit hovers over the waters and brings about a restoration of God’s intended purpose

for the earth. This is in fact the historic role of Messiah. Therefore, both Jewish and

Christian sources see the need for Messianic intervention very early in the Biblical text.

Upon reading the whole book, we can readily understand that the revelation of Christ is

progressive. Christianity has often feared the Old Testament. Interestingly enough, it

was the most effective missionary tool of the first century.

One of the greatest tools for discovering just who Jesus was as Messiah is to see Him in

the pictures and types given in the Old Testament. Two of the greatest Biblical figures of

the Old Testament were Joseph and David. These two Messianic figures give the

foremost understanding of the split role of Messiah.

2. Christ in the New Testament

Apostolic Hermeneutics determined the validity of the Christo-Centric Hermeneutics. Christ,

Himself, determined that the Old Testament should be interpreted to understand the

Messianic occupation.

In study of the historical person of Jesus, the Messiah, scholars try to refute His Messiahship

based on the fact that He did not claim any Messianic titles for Himself. This need not be

alarming but rather inspirational. Jesus did not just claim to be the Messiah. He claimed to

be more than the Messiah. He claimed to be the “Son of God.”

Even though we put our faith in the Biblical Jesus, there is a historical Jewish Jesus for whom

more evidence exists than for Julius Caesar. We need not divide faith from history, as long

as both are accurate.

VII. Conclusion

We have mentioned in more than one location the threefold premise of Hermeneutics. That

foundation is exegesis, devotion and homiletics. We must remember that the Church is a

community of Believers. As a community, it is our obligation to see to it that those who are

weak are restored and elevated by the strong (Gal. 6:1).

The Hermeneutic process does well to determine the original intent and meaning of the

Biblical text. However, the obvious point in Biblical study is application. If we cannot apply


28

what we have learned; what use is it? While the Hermeneutic process tries to ascertain the

meaning of each word, Homiletics tries to determine what the contemporary Christian can

conclude from the ancient text. All Hermeneutic principles in the world are aimed at one

conclusion. That conclusion is the ability to convey truth to others through the Homiletics

process. Hermeneutics are simply a tool.

Documents

Advanced Hermeneutics Outlined - feridoon.comferidoon.com/Articles-W/English/Advanced Hermeneutics Outlined.pdf · Advanced Hermeneutics Outlined-Feridoon Mokhof 3 These basic steps